1. The Defendant’s subdivision of the Daegu District Court to the Plaintiff is based on the Decision 2016Kadan3939 Decided May 31, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 31, 2017, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the claim for the payment of construction cost against the Seogu District Court Branch 2016Kadan39, the said court rendered a judgment that “The Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 782,550 won and the amount equivalent to 5% per annum from January 30, 2016 to May 31, 2017, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment,” and the said judgment was finalized on June 23, 2017.

(hereinafter “instant judgment”). (b)

On August 10, 2017, the Defendant filed an application for compulsory execution with the Seo-gu District Court Branch Branch 2017No1312 with respect to the movable property owned by the Plaintiff as the executive title, and the seizure of the said movable property was conducted on August 17, 2017. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an application for the suspension of compulsory execution with the Seo-gu District Court Branch Branch 2017KadanMa40 on August 24, 2017.

C. On December 18, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for confirmation of the amount of litigation costs related to the instant judgment (Seoul District Court Branch Branch Decision 2017Kadan109), and the Defendant rendered a decision to refund KRW 2,291,039 to the Plaintiff as litigation costs, and the said decision became final and conclusive on January 11, 2018.

On December 28, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail containing the intent to offset the amount of the litigation costs of KRW 2,291,039 against the Defendant’s claim for reimbursement, using the Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement of the litigation costs of KRW 2,291,039 as an automatic bond. The content-certified mail reached the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 9, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim and the aforementioned evidence, the Plaintiff’s obligation on the final and conclusive judgment of the construction cost case against the Defendant in this Court Order 2016Da3939, Dec. 31, 2017, as of December 31, 2017, as of the offset date, KRW 903,193, and KRW 782,550, and KRW 52,170, and KRW 170, from January 30, 2016 to May 31, 2017.